SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
climate crisis
A Second Trump Presidency Would Be a Planetary Disaster
A Republican victory in November would be an existential threat to climate action and a scorched-earth nightmare for the nation—and the world—simply cannot afford.
Oct 25, 2024
The 2024 U.S. presidential election is a referendum on whether or not America will be a partner or a roadblock to global climate action. Just a week after the U.S. election, the next global climate conference will work out the technical details and new global climate finance goal at Baku’s COP29. The U.S. election will set the tone and tenor of this important meeting. Whoever wins in November will determine if the United States will be a global partner to the diverse issues connected to climate, energy transition, and development finance—or a nation withdrawn at best and a hostile actor at worst.
Globally, climate-fueled events are costing us all $16 million per hour through wildfires, storms, and drought—amplifying livelihood insecurities and potentially putting the global sustainable development goals out of reach. The majority of Americans polled want to see climate policies that can address the climate shocks being felt today. But only the Democratic ticket of Kamala Harris and Tim Walz has a plan to address these challenges.
The climate crisis does not exist in a political vacuum. That’s why the Biden-Harris administration has centered climate in various arenas: international aid, foreign policy, conservation, energy, and so much more. On President Biden’s first day in office, the administration rejoined the Paris Agreement and reversed many of the environmental rollbacks President Trump enacted. As Vice President, Kamala Harris worked tirelessly to pass the monumental Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The IRA is among the world's largest single investment in climate to date, including incentives for renewables and expanding on programs for communities coping with climate and environmental injustices. A Harris-Walz administration would continue and expand off the IRA to address the climate and environmental challenges Americans are facing at home while maintaining emissions reduction targets that meet global climate goals.
A future President Harris would see America continuing its leadership role in global climate forums. She would address the myriad of climate challenges as economic opportunities that can be interwoven throughout domestic and global endeavors. A future President Harris would continue policies normalized around the world—like participating in the World Bank and in global climate forums in partnership. This is a future where the United States continues to wield influence and shape agendas on climate, security, and international development. This is in sharp contrast to what the other side is offering.
As president, Trump took the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement, expanded oil development on previously protected lands, and slashed environmental protections that protect Americans from unsafe air and water. Environmentally, we can expect the same and much worse from a second Trump administration.
The Republican Platform this year was limited on details, but outlined core goals that align with the Heritage Foundation’s Project 2025 playbook. In the past, republican presidents have aligned and adopted the Heritage Foundation’s agendas. For instance, President Reagan adopted roughly 60% of their Mandate for Leadership.
If Project 2025 is implemented it would represent an America in retreat. It would harm global cooperation on climate and potentially break multilateral forums. A Trump-Vance ticket is offering an America unmoored from geopolitical and economic reality; a future where the U.S. removes itself from the International Monetary Fund, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, and the World Bank. Without U.S contributions to these institutions, though all must do more and reforms remain necessary, global climate action would be strained for most emerging and developing countries. Today, the U.S. is the largest contributor to the World Bank, which provides the lion’s share of global climate finance, amounting to $38.6 billion in 2023.
A Trump-Vance administration would—once more—remove the U.S. from the Paris Agreement and depart from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC). Detaching the United States from global climate frameworks would mean global climate goals are unlikely to be met. Coal-reliant nations like China, Australia, and India would have a free pass to continue to exploit coal despite the costs and risks, both nationally and globally. An unsustainable path towards 2.0°C or 3.0°C would become more likely.
America and the world cannot afford to ignore climate, especially when it’s cheaper, more beneficial economically, and avoids the worst climate consequences to face our climate reality head on. The world cannot afford a prospective U.S. presidential ticket hellbent on fostering global and domestic instability across the board. A ticket that considers science as fiction cannot act in the best interest of the American people at home nor abroad.
Elections are about the future, juxtaposed against the challenges of the present. Climate is today’s challenge and opportunity. A Trump-Vance ticket would be a scorched earth reality for our climate, inevitable energy transition, and the financing developing nations need. It is no competition—the world needs a future President Harris.
Note: The opinions expressed are solely that of the author and do not represent an endorsement from any of her current or past affiliated organizations.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Kamala Harris' Economic Vision Underscores Clear Climate Choice in 2024 Election
Donald Trump’s Project 2025 would cost the economy billions, jack up household bills, and rob us of a safer climate future. It isn’t just a policy proposal—it’s a full-scale assault on progress.
Oct 18, 2024
Vice President Kamala Harris recently unveiled her new economic plan, a vision for America that not only charts a path to tackle climate pollution but harnesses it as an opportunity to build a more affordable, prosperous country. Her plans and record shows we can tackle the climate crisis while creating a more equitable economy. In fact, the Biden-Harris administration’s climate law has already spurred over $372 billion in investments and created more than 334,000 new jobs—with nearly half of the benefits going to historically marginalized groups, including low-income households and Black, Brown, and Indigenous communities.
At Evergreen Action, we’re fighting to enact policies to tackle the climate crisis head-on while making people’s lives better. One way we do that is by holding politicians accountable to their climate commitments and shining a light on the impact of climate policy, good or bad. This election, the choice could not be more stark.
This election isn’t just about choosing between two candidates—it’s about choosing between two radically different futures.
Donald Trump’s Project 2025 would cost the economy billions, jack up household bills, and rob us of a safer climate future. It isn’t just a policy proposal—it’s a full-scale assault on progress. It would dismantle clean energy programs, roll back pollution standards, and undermine America’s global leadership in the clean energy economy.
If Trump’s Project 2025 becomes reality, America could lose 1.7 million jobs by 2030, and household energy costs could rise by $32 billion. The health impacts could be even more devastating: hundreds of thousands of new asthma cases and over 25,000 premature deaths by 2050, with marginalized communities bearing the brunt.
This election isn’t just about choosing between two candidates—it’s about choosing between two radically different futures. Vice President Harris offers a path where clean energy fuels economic growth, cuts costs, creates jobs, and protects our communities. Trump’s Project 2025, on the other hand, represents a future where corrupt polluters run the show, slamming the door shut on saving our planet—and blocking all the benefits that would come with it.
We don’t have to settle for Trump’s outdated, short-sighted approach. Continued climate leadership, supported by actionable policies, offers a pathway to a prosperous and healthy future. Earlier this year, Evergreen Action published a roadmap for the next president, built in collaboration with climate, environmental justice, and labor partners, to build on the Biden-Harris administration’s historic climate achievements and fight climate change while building a thriving clean energy economy.
This plan would set us on track to achieve 100% clean energy, revitalize American industry by onshoring manufacturing, create millions of good-paying union jobs, and ensure we lead the world in clean energy. And, our plan would make polluters pay, finally holding Big Oil accountable for its role in fueling the climate crisis.
Our plan would make polluters pay, finally holding Big Oil accountable for its role in fueling the climate crisis.
Rather than tie us to the expensive, polluting fossil fuels of the past, we can grow our clean energy economy that strengthens the middle class. Electing a Harris-Walz administration and advocating for robust climate policies like those in our plan can create 3.9 million jobs, save households $39 billion in energy costs, and protect thousands of lives by 2030 compared to Trump’s Project 2025.
In Pennsylvania, grants through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) are propelling the Commonwealth’s clean energy industries, creating thousands of jobs, and ensuring American workers lead in producing clean energy technology. Meanwhile, Michigan is seeing an economic boom supported by federal investments that are projected to cut household energy bills by $713 annually by 2040 and generate $27.8 billion in public health savings.
Trump’s promise to repeal these investments wouldn’t just kill jobs and stunt economic growth—it would destroy America’s competitiveness in clean energy manufacturing and deployment.
Despite Trump’s insistence once again that climate change is “one of the great scams”—even as Hurricanes Milton and Helene brought catastrophic flooding across the South, killing at least 300 people and leaving thousands stranded and without power—climate change is no longer a distant threat. It’s powering a growing barrage of record-breaking weather events every year. Higher ocean temperatures fuel rapidly intensifying storms, making hurricane season even more deadly. Arizona is enduring record-breaking heatwaves, while states like North Carolina and Texas are being hit by once-in-1,000-year rainfalls with alarming frequency.
This is our last shot. If we make the right choice, we’ll not only preserve a safer future for all Americans, but we’ll reap significant benefits—good-paying union jobs, lower energy costs, and a healthier environment. The alternative? A future with rising temperatures, more extreme weather, and higher prices.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Will Helene Force Vance to Face Climate Crisis on the Debate Stage?
In a time when we face unprecedented disaster, we need our media institutions to be a source of truth and honesty and to be ready to hold those in power accountable.
Oct 01, 2024
Tonight is the vice presidential debate and it’s likely the final debate of the election and the last opportunity for voters to see both tickets side-by-side. The backdrop will be the once-in-a-generation devastation of Hurricane Helene.
When Walz and Vance take the stage, tens of thousands of people won’t know if their loved ones are alive or if they have a home to go back to. Many more will just be beginning a recovery effort that will take years and cost an estimated $90 billion or more. And Helene is just one sign of the catastrophic destruction that climate change could bring.
We deserve some answers from these men who are running to be second in line to the presidency. CBS debate moderator Norah O'Donnell must ask both JD Vance and Tim Walz what their administrations would do to stop disasters like Helene from becoming the new normal. And, in particular, she needs to be ready to hold JD Vance accountable to actually delivering a response.
With the backdrop of Helene, O'Donnell has an opportunity to show a different path tonight. She can ask strong questions and be ready with facts to hold Vance accountable.
The reality is that our politicians are not confronting the climate crisis at the scale and speed that science and justice demand. Our Vice President is boasting about record oil and gas production in a time when scientists have warned we must be decarbonizing as fast as possible. And her opponent, Donald Trump, is a climate denier who has promised oil and gas billionaires to do their bidding in exchange for a billion dollars. When the candidates were asked about climate change in the last debate, Trump entirely dodged the question, instead pivoting to an irrelevant tangent about auto-plants and tariffs, despite the fact that Biden’s landmark Inflation Reduction Act actually created manufacturing jobs. ABC news moderators didn’t follow up or press the question.
In the year 2024 that doesn’t cut it. Scientists say we have just a handful of years left to stop catastrophic climate change. Helene’s apocalyptic nature is only a sign of the years to come. That makes the next four years of American politics an absolutely critical time for bold climate policy. We could be investing in resilient renewable electricity grids, updating our bridges and our roads, and making sure our homes and infrastructure are ready for disaster. We could be restoring wetlands, mangroves, and forests; expanding FEMA; and building a workforce that is ready to respond to disasters. And above all, we need to decarbonize our economy as fast as humanly possible.
But looking at media coverage, you’d hardly know the urgency of the climate crisis. The vast majority of media coverage of disasters like Helene doesn’t identify climate change as a factor. Even when broadcast news does talk about climate change, only 12% of the time do they mention burning fossil fuels as the problem. And in a bizarre attempt at neutrality, climate deniers in the Republican Party are regularly platformed without being fact-checked or held accountable for their lies.
With the backdrop of Helene, O'Donnell has an opportunity to show a different path tonight. She can ask strong questions and be ready with facts to hold Vance accountable. She should have on hand statements from JD Vance outlining his denial of human-caused climate change—a sharp reversal from his status as a green tech investor just a few years ago. She should be ready to cite opposition to the Inflation Reduction Act, a landmark green energy bill that invests $12 billion in Ohio’s green energy economy and has created good, union jobs.
In a time when we face unprecedented disaster, we need our media institutions to be a source of truth and honesty and to be ready to hold those in power accountable. The tens of thousands of people who have lost their homes to Helene, the people who have had to evacuate from wildfires, the elderly and young people who have died from heat waves, the young people who are scared for their future—we are owed answers.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular